Alright, I can live with that. Just as long as it actually does successfully transform our current scripts as you said it would.

The conversion would be done with the utmost care. I can't guarantee there will be no bugs on initial release, but we will do our best. One option may be to support both syntaxes on the initial release, and then phase out the old, but that also has it's complications.

The conversion would be done with the utmost care. I can't guarantee there will be no bugs on initial release, but we will do our best. One option may be to support both syntaxes on the initial release, and then phase out the old, but that also has it's complications.

Well of course there's going to be bugs, I just hope that a major one doesn't slip past your eye and mess up 200 scripts in one world, but I have confidence that things will work smoothly.

I don't see what negatives would come of this, besides the afore mentioned old scripts possibly getting broken. Though, I dont have many maps on that I have spent months scripting in so I may be taking this lighter than others because of a slight bias.

The main reason I don't do much scripting though is because of the way the system is set up though to be honest. It's all very organized and it isn't very confusing, but it's hard and tedious. I oft find myself repeatedly looking back at the script guide to know where which parameters go where. With a system that could support any parameter anywhere I would be much happier for sure.

Sounds like a good idea with positive outcomes if the script conversion works smoothly. With the idea of simplicity for users in mind might I make a suggestion, add a color system to the new syntax that will distinguish the command functions from variables like x,y,z and an active syntax error check that can highlight incorrect lines red while your scripting.Example: rain /p=x,y,z /r=value /d=value /i=value /c=r,g,b/ Like was stated earlier "I read those square brackets like gypsies read tea leaves..", this could help once we get used to it.

Sounds like a good idea with positive outcomes if the script conversion works smoothly. With the idea of simplicity for users in mind might I make a suggestion, add a color system to the new syntax that will distinguish the command functions from variables like x,y,z and an active syntax error check that can highlight incorrect lines red while your scripting.Example: rain /p=x,y,z /r=value /d=value /i=value /c=r,g,b/ Like was stated earlier "I read those square brackets like gypsies read tea leaves..", this could help once we get used to it.

This new way if I read it right we don't have to put them in an order nor make them follow a format. This will great for scriptures who want to make here own format in a way in the means of how were order the parameters.

Ex.

say we have the rain command "Rain [x,z] [radius] [duration] [intensity] [r,g,b]" we could make it ordered any way we want and make it to our liking.

Rain /r,g,b /duration /intensity /radius /x,z

This will also be helpful not so much for xbox but PC were instead of finding the script in the game then pasting it in and changing the parameters you would eventually learn how to write out the command in your own format or however so. I feel this will boost the productivity and the amount of people who script.

I hope this is still being considered and hope this will take over the old version.

Also the syntax we talk about on stream a few times, how if scripting was like the mob AI trees i hope can be an options too.

This seems like a good idea, but the more I read into this the more I realize that I really like the current syntax the way it is. Sure it has its fair share of bugs, but if you know how to work the scripting language to the point of having a basic understanding (1-2 months at most) you can find your way around them and the more you get used to doing the scrips naturally, the less errors you will encounter. I am not completely disregarding this as it is a very good concept, I just prefer the current syntax.